Forum menu
What Kelvin said - it was clear and unequivocal, but Ernie has to try and turn into something I didn't say, doesn't he.
Ernie has to try and turn into something I didn’t say, doesn’t he.
FFS grow up. You have just criticised me for pointing out that some people are obsessed with which issues garner the most votes, despite the fact that they can't even get that right.
Did you actually look at the YouGov link? Only 9% think refugees/asylum seekers shouldn't be allowed into the UK, 30% think that we should carry on as we are. And on top of that another 30% think that we should allow more in!
I don't know the accuracy of the poll but even with accepted margins of errors the picture isn't what some people appear to think it is.
A reminder that this -
A strange comment from someone who claims that they are not bothered whether the Tories are critised for “shooting refugees or cheating at the village tombola”.
... was clearly not what I said.
Your complete sentence :
I don’t care if it’s for shooting refugees or cheating at the village tombola -if Kier can use it to skewer Johnson and get the c*** out of No 10, get stuck in, big man.
If you do care you have said so.
I care massively what Johnson is being criticised for.
Growing up is accepting life is not perfect and you have to take the best options you get.
If the tories are more likely to lose votes based on wallpaper and parties than aguably more important things then play on that rather than act like a 16 year old who will only be happy with perfection/everyone thinking the same way they do.
Btw with reference to this :
Only 9% think refugees/asylum seekers shouldn’t be allowed into the UK, 30% think that we should carry on as we are. And on top of that another 30% think that we should allow more in!
It should be remembered that that is even with the Labour Party remaining embarrassingly quiet on the matter, image how things could shift even more in the direction of compassion if Starmer used it as a stick to beat the Tories with.
The reason the Tories feel comfortable pushing through this nasty and pointless bill is precisely because they know that it will, at worse, receive token opposition from Labour, and at best no effective opposition at all.
To repeat - this...
I don’t care if it’s for shooting refugees or cheating at the village tombola -if Kier can use it to skewer Johnson and get the c*** out of No 10, get stuck in, big man.
... does clearly not equal this...
A strange comment from someone who claims that they are not bothered whether the Tories are critised for “shooting refugees or cheating at the village tombola”.
... no matter how much you really, REALLY wish it did. Although your attempt to reinterpret a very simple message is instructive.
So I copy and paste your comment in its entirety and you're still not happy?
It should be remembered that that is even with the Labour Party remaining embarrassingly quiet on the matter, image how things could shift even more in the direction of compassion if Starmer used it as a stick to beat the Tories with.
Very much this and if you look to Scotland you can see this in action!
If the tories are more likely to lose votes based on wallpaper and parties than aguably more important things then play on that rather than act like a 16 year old who will only be happy with perfection/everyone thinking the same way they do.
There is an argument for that but then why do the polls generally bounce back?
It's never going to be one thing, it's going to be the aggregate of several issues that stick, and political fatigue.
On top of that people have the idea that Labour are somehow useless and no good with the economy, and not seen as an alternative which is becoming a strong narrative.
This is evidently rubbish but it doesn't matter, it's about smashing this wall down along with the myths that are strong amongst the electorate.
Also do Tory voters really want to admit they were wrong in electing him?
Why does spell checker always try to make me look a ****?
So I copy and paste your comment in it’s entirety and you’re still not happy?
Not if it doesn't with an acknowledgement that you were talking through your hat.
Edit - in response to....
I care massively what Johnson is being criticised for.
... I refer you to the question I've just retrieved from the previous page;
You’d rather Johnson stayed in if the only lever to get him out is of comparatively little consequence?
Why does spell checker always try to make me look a ****?
Because it knows you?
Oh well you're gonna have to remain unhappy. Sorry about that.
Because it knows you?
So predictable! As I wrote it I knew exactly what was coming.
It's an easy conclusion to come to, I'll grant you that.
Oh well you’re gonna have to remain unhappy. Sorry about that.
Par for this particular course.
It’s an easy conclusion to come to, I’ll grant you that.
Well personal digs is what I like.
So much less worrisome than carefully thought out counter-arguments.
So much less worrisome than carefully thought out counter-arguments.
There's no point with your level of responses.
Sorry guys - whether you agree with him or not Ernie has the best debating skills of anyone on here! frustratingly good at times.
Ernie for PM! ( so long as he agrees we can go back into the EU!)
Sorry guys – whether you agree with him or not Ernie has the best debating skills of anyone on here!
One mans debating skills are another mans annoying near troll I suppose.
Very much this and if you look to Scotland you can see this in action!
Starting to wish I was in Scotland. 'Tone' of government is way different.
So predictable! As I wrote it I knew exactly what was coming.
I'm not surprised: you seem to know what everyone is thinking.
'Get a grip' I take to mean do what you're doing but more effectively. Is this meant to be 'opposition'?
Sorry guys – whether you agree with him or not Ernie has the best debating skills of anyone on here!
LOL
Starmer sticking the boot in again
<div class="quoted__contents">
[Johnson is] not fit for office and because he’s not fit for office, he won’t resign and the question really is for Tory members of the cabinet, Tory MPs, to ask themselves are they prepared to put up with this?
He’s not fit for office. He’s not going to be fit for office.
Are they prepared to go through the degrading of themselves and their party, to go out to the media, have to defend the indefensible for months to come?
Or are they going to actually have the courage now to challenge him and say you’re not fit for office?
</div>
One mans debating skills are another mans annoying near troll I suppose.
Yes, in reality I don't think that the Nationality and Borders Bill is a nasty and unnecessary bill which Starmer should be focusing more attention on, I was trolling. FFS
And don't talk shite TJ, I don't possess any particular 'debating skills' as you claim. I left school with grade 2 CSE, such is my lack of literary skills.
You are passing off me being occasionally spot-bollock correct with some imaginary debating skills.
If you are wrong you are wrong, all the debating skills in the world won't change that. I am a trade building worker with very basic education, if someone can't come up with a convincing counter-argument as why Starmer shouldn't be focusing more on the deeply nasty and pointless Nationality and Borders Bill, which went through parliament yesterday, then that has nothing to do with debating skills.
Starmer focused on the PM’s lying at PMQs (again) because it is costing the PM support. If he’d focused on “Nationality and Borders” instead, no one would haven been more grateful for that than the PM. It’s his safe ground when it comes to shoring up his support.
This got petty and nasty for a while.
if someone can’t come up with a convincing counter-argument as why Starmer shouldn’t be focusing more on the deeply nasty and pointless Nationality and Borders Bill, which went through parliament yesterday, then that has nothing to do with debating skills.
As for ^this, I think Keir is playing it right. Yes, this Bill is awful and needs to be effectively opposed, but to prioritise that right now means going up against a strong and unified government (on this Bill).
If Keir can use trust, integrity and Christmas parties as a lever so confidence is undermined, Tories are rebelling, the PM is under threat and the Tory majority can't be relied on, that's a much more effective way of opposing any other legislation, shirley?
And don’t talk shite TJ, I don’t possess any particular ‘debating skills’ as you claim. I left school with grade 2 CSE, such is my lack of literary skills.
Debating skills is nowt to do with literacy - and if you are shite how shite is everyone else? I assumed ( and I know....) that you had honed your skills in the revolutionary front of judea
but to prioritise that right now means going up against a strong and unified government (on this Bill).
You obviously didn't read the links that I provided, I even made a point of choosing the Guardian as a sauce.
They are not strong and united over the bill. There were over a couple of dozen Tory rebels, even Theresa May expressed reservations over the bill. One of the most outspoken critic was a former Tory cabinet member/ deputy leader.
And if right now whilst the bill is going through parliament isn't the time to prioritise it when is, in six months time?
The Labour Party might be excited about wallpaper and Christmas parties because the right-wing press also is but the Tories will still, whatever happens, be in government in 6 months time. The lost rights of refugees and asylum seekers won't be.
And remember, the reason people like David Davis are opposed to the bill isn't simply because it will deny refugees basic rights, but because it is a pointless and costly exercise that will achieve nothing, other than keep ranting Daily Mail column writers happy. Not that even they believe the bollocks that they spout.
I assumed ( and I know….) that you had honed your skills in the revolutionary front of judea
Yes the Party educated me, I won't deny that. But also don't underestimate what a semi-educated building worker can achieve with easy access to the internet and spellcheck......when it doesn't let me down 😃
choosing the Guardian as a sauce.
and spellcheck……when it doesn’t let me down 😃
😉
Who are Election Maps UK? That is an impressive 8% lead for Labour. The LibDems on 1% higher than the Greens is suspect though. If correct I can't see the LibDems taking North Shropshire next Thursday.
It’s Focal Data polling. EMUK report all election and poll results, I follow them for local politics by-elections between UK wide elections (because I’m dull) but there are great for compiling poll results as well.
On North Shropshire, I suspect the Conservatives will hold it, despite such poor attitudes towards them at the moment… because the opposition vote will be split.
if someone can’t come up with a convincing counter-argument as why Starmer shouldn’t be focusing more on the deeply nasty and pointless Nationality and Borders Bill
Perhaps because he is not against the bill. His attitude to immigration is more Tory than Labour:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/oct/09/keir-starmer-calls-for-immigration-to-be-reduced
It’s Focal Data polling. EMUK report all election and poll results
Ah gotcha.
Well if the LibDems are polling so low and yet claiming to be in a better position than Labour to win North Shropshire then I can see a big split in the anti-Tory vote.
Although the Tories themselves will have to contend with another 4 right-wing candidates, I can see the pandemic deniers votes going to them. So the Tory vote will almost certainly spilt too. They never had to deal with so many right-wing rivals last GE
North Shropshire should be interesting that's for sure!
Edit : I have never heard of Focal Data btw.
The LibDem vote will surge. I expect Labour to come third. I grew up in Herefordshire, and any soft Tory vote in the rural border area (Shropshire/Herefordshire/Gloucestershire) will go to the LibDems. To unseat these Shire Tories we need the LibDems to sort themselves out (they are a mess right now) and Labour to give them a clean run in key seats.
and Labour to give them a clean run.
Why? According to the national poll you have just posted Labour are 34 points above the LibDems. And 2 years ago in the general election Labour received twice as many votes in North Shropshire as the LibDems did.
You want them to throw all that away to give a chance to a party that when it was a position to make a difference decided to jump into bed with the Tories and rain down austerity onto the British people?
Edit : Labour's message should be "if you don't want the Tories in power don't vote LibDem".
Because of local differences. There are areas where the LibDems can win voters off the Conservatives that Labour simply can not. Even when the LibDems are as weak as they currently are. The UK is far from homogenous. Minimising the number of Conservative MPs requires other parties to campaign smarter and make room for each other where need be. FPTP stinks, but for now we’re stuck with it, and Labour needs to recognise that. It’s one of the reasons Clive Lewis is in my top five for next Labour Leader.
Edit : Labour’s message should be “if you don’t want the Tories in power don’t vote LibDem”.
Of course there are seats where that approach just results in a Tory win. Replacing LibDem MPs with Conservative MPs after the coalition years didn’t benefit Labour (or any of us).
Well I don't see the point, from Labour's point of view, of giving credibility to a party which for the last 10 ten years has had so little credibility in the eyes of UK voters. In the last general election even its leader couldn't hold onto her seat.
One of the reasons Labour didn't win in 2010 is precisely because the anti-Tory vote was split. Helping to breath new life into a party which has done so much to discredit itself makes no sense for Labour.
I get your point about how easily Tory voters can switch to the LibDems though, that's no great surprise.
But opposing the Tories in a meaningful way requires hard work with convincing arguments - providing real alternatives, not the easy "we will say whatever you want as to say".
Problem is the brutal and reactionary sectarianism of Starmer is likely to split the Labour vote. The only saving grace is that real change is much more likely to come from the workplace, streets and community whoever presides in Downing Street. It certainly wasn't the LP who defeated the poll tax nor the NF.
Ernie, I’m sure it was you that said only the other day that Blair only won at least one of his elections because the LibDems did so well? That in some elections since then Labour won a bigger share of the vote, but didn’t get into government? Something about Blair benefiting from the vagaries of FPTP? Apologies if I’m wrong. The rural areas of the Shire border counties, just like the West Country, are nothing like the conurbations of the South East, central England or The North of England. Flipping seats to Labour there may not be impossible, but, for now, it still doesn’t look likely, even if national polling is looking better than it has for a while. If Labour go for a “win every seat” campaign at the next election, the Conservatives stand to keep their seats in these areas, if not gain more.
That in some elections since then Labour won a bigger share of the vote, but didn’t get into government? Something about Blair benefiting from the vagaries of FPTP? Apologies if I’m wrong.
No I said that. I pointed out that Blair got less votes in 2005 than Corbyn got in 2017.
It still doesn't make sense for Labour to increase the credibility of a rival party, whose vote has massively collapsed in the last 10 years by helping them to win a high profile by-election.
There is no doubt that the LibDem vote in 2010 helped to stop Ed Miliband becoming PM. But since then they are more likely to win over the disaffected Tory vote than the disaffected Labour vote. Which is great news for Labour.
The LibDems are no longer seen as a particularly anti-Tory party in the way they once were.
Labour needs to drive home the message that voting LibDem when the alternative is Labour only helps the Tories. Not suggesting that they are also an alternative to the Tories.
piemonster
Free MemberAlthough prior to ‘97 the last Labour election victory was ‘74 and that took a couple of goes.
So if they were “leading” prior to Blair they were doing a crap job of it.
For the 50 millionth time, they were absolutely leading prior to Blair, the only reason Blair became PM is that John Smith died after doing all the hard work (well, John Major did a lot of the hard work too to be fair). One of the various problems Labour has is that a lot of them have deleted key parts of the past, so "Blair made us electable" is the law and people constantly want to be another Blair, while Smith who actually achieved it (and Kinnock who took them a lot of the way there but didn't quite get across the line) are overlooked.
In more recent times…
The reason Kier is not very popular is simple, he's a bit dull and measured.
Ironicaly these are qualities that are needed in leading a government, blanced, considered, not showy or reactionary.
Someone should inform the electorate.
Just listened to his reply to Boris's statement last night. He said absolutely the right things, got some nice little digs in, but in such a dull way.
For the 50 millionth time
I'd say that anyone who cares/remembers knows this (and had Smith become PM some on here would shortly after be calling him a traitor to socialism and bigging up Benn). I could go further back to Healey losing to Foot, entryists and the grim Thatcher years. But anyway - Starmer and the long walk back to electability and, probably conditional on SNP if not libdem support, power.
In more recent times…
Do we have the poll numbers for Starmer vs Liz Truss or Rishi Sunak? 🤢
Blair got less votes in 2005 than Corbyn got in 2017
The electorate had grown by 2 million, the libdems had collapsed, and corbyn lost.
For the 50 millionth time, they were absolutely leading prior to Blair, the only reason Blair became PM is that John Smith died after doing all the hard work (well, John Major did a lot of the hard work too to be fair). One of the various problems Labour has is that a lot of them have deleted key parts of the past, so “Blair made us electable” is the law and people constantly want to be another Blair, while Smith who actually achieved it (and Kinnock who took them a lot of the way there but didn’t quite get across the line) are overlooked.
You actually didn't need to tell me any of that. Nobody learned anything there.
Although you may be overplaying Smith and under playing the effect of the Tories being in power for a very long time.
I once attended a rally for election workers/canvassers in a local hall in which John Smith, who was then Labour Leader, and Tony Blair, who was his Shadow Home Secretary, spoke.
The rally was intended as morale boost for election workers as Croydon at the time had an important Tory marginal which Labour very much needed to win. And also to provide publicity through the media.
The first to speak was Tony Blair and remember thinking to myself "why am I listening to this geezer waffling on endless about nothing when I could be doing something useful like knocking on doors or delivering leaflets". It was like listening to a sermon being delivered from a pulpit, utterly dull and easy to switch off.
Then John Smith stood up and spoke and everything changed instantly. He spoke with total passion and the atmosphere was electric. He savaged Thatcher and I particularly remember him denouncing her for saying that there was no such thing as society, which he claimed was quite the worse thing she had ever said.
The contrast between the two could not have been greater, likewise the effect on the audience.
John Smith was on the right of the party, as it was then, for sure. But that was Old Labour and there was much tolerance, and respect, between the different wings of the party, which is certainly not something that exists these days.
Furthermore the right-wing in the days of Old Labour was incomparably more left-wing than the right-wing under New Labour. Dennis Healey's policies as Chancellor would today be denounced as hard-left. Can you imagine what the media reaction would have been had Corbyn's Shadow Chancellor said, as Healey did, that he would squeeze the rich until their pips squeak?
Under Old Labour the right-wing was to the left of Labour's 2017 election manifesto.
Blair got less votes in 2005 than Corbyn got in 2017
The electorate had grown by 2 million, the libdems had collapsed and corbyn lost.
Okay ...... Blair got a smaller share of the vote in 2005 than Corbyn got in 2017.
And Corbyn losing was precisely the point.... Tony Blair was very very lucky because FPTP worked so well for him.
Btw try to remember why the LibDem vote collapsed, it's not a great unsolved mystery.
I see Starmer said tonight that it’s labour’s patriotic duty to agree with the tories. I think that confirms the suspicions many of us have.
I see Starmer said tonight that it’s labour’s patriotic duty to agree with the tories.
That's taken completely out of context and in, consequence, is misleading.
As for N Shropshire - LibDems 2-1 on, tories 6-4.
It is a tragedy that John Smith died when he did.
His imagined survival makes for an interesting timeline.
It's gone though.
I see Starmer said tonight that it’s labour’s patriotic duty to agree with the tories
Are you referring to the TV broadcast? If so that's some real selective interpretation to get that conclusion. I thought he came across OK. Said the right things and got a couple of subtle digs at the pm in. Yes, it wasn't electric or radical, but it wasn't the time for that.
duty to agree with the tories
Which Tories? The rebels, or the government? I’m glad that Labour are putting lives and NHS workers first, and didn’t go through the voting lobbies with the nuttiest of Conservative MPs. Shame on the LibDems as well.
Wasn't sure where to post this, but I'm glad Starmer backed Boris and not this fool
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/desmond-swayne-vaccine-passports-omicron-b1976083.html
I’m glad that Labour are putting lives and NHS workers first
As am I. But they should also have put workers first and they didn’t do that by refusing to demand increases to sick pay, and support for hospitality workers who might be laid off because of the new restrictions. They had a golden opportunity to win some concessions in these areas but instead they supported Boris with no questions or conditions.
3%?
Christ on a bendybus!
We’re in the middle of a pandemic with infection rates going mental and public health policy was about to be derailed by a gang of far right headbangers who exist in some insane alternative dimension where they’re seriously comparing these modest precautions to ‘Nazi Germany’
In the same way that a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day Boris has somewhat bizarrely found himself on the right side for once. It must be a pretty weird experience for him
Starmer has done exactly the right thing. If you thought he could do anything else, and hand victory to those gaggle of right wing libertarian lunatics, with the implications that would have for the country and the NHS in particular then you need your bumps feeling!
but instead they supported Boris with no questions or conditions.
Are you seriously suggesting that Labour could have voted against an issue which they consider to be of vital public health importance?
I don't think Labour voted today to support "Boris". They voted to support something which they believe is necessary at this present time during this pandemic.
dazh,
Your wing of the Labour party have had two stabs at it, failed once and then failed miserably, time to let the other wing have a go, unless you want to face eternal Tory rule.
He may have confirmed your suspicions but the suspicion he's trying to rouse with the public at large is that he might be Prime Minister material.
Thought he did quite well on the telly the other night, stealing all the Governments props and all. People could have ridiculed him, accusing him of looking like a fake PM with that set up but they aren't, perhaps because he pulled off the optics of looking more like a leader than the actual one.
Your wing of the Labour party have had two stabs at it, failed once and then failed miserably, time to let the other wing have a go, unless you want to face eternal Tory rule.
Out of curiosity why do you think Dazh "wing of the party" should behave any different from the right wing side of the party? Especially given the left of the party has the obvious incentive of noticing how much the overton windows shifts when it is handed to the right wingers.
People could have ridiculed him, accusing him of looking like a fake PM with that set up but they aren’t,
or people just didnt notice him at all.
Out of curiosity why do you think Dazh “wing of the party” should behave any different from the right wing side of the party?
Oh these votes, they should have done exactly the same as Starmer and most other Labour MPs did. It’s a shame some (and sadly Lucas as well) voted with the “it’s an imposition to have to have a Covid test to enter a busy social space for entertainment if you refuse the vaccines offered” nutters in the Conservative party.
Your wing of the Labour party have had two stabs at it, failed once and then failed miserably, time to let the other wing have a go, unless you want to face eternal Tory rule.
The damage done by your wing Inkster was incalculable. They were devastated when the Tories failed to win the 2017 general election and redoubled their efforts with endless attacks on the leader, briefing the Tory press, accusing their own party of being racist, stage-managed resignations, and generally providing endless ammunition to the Tories to secure a stunning victory for them in 2019.
And still your wing of the Labour Party relentlessly attacks and fights dazh's wing.
But you want to tell Dazh to focus on the Tories?
Edit : Btw Inkster your wing lost in 2010 and 2015. That didn't however motivate them to stand behind their leader afterwards. Other than to stab him in the back.
Wes Streeting made Javid look way out of his depth today, the way starmer is looking confident & in control compared to bozo
whats apparent is that currently Labour under Starmer is far more disciplined than the Tories under Johnson
This is working well for labour in the polls, but red wall seats , midlands, north east etc are not swinging back to labour in the same numbers they are elsewhere, it means that even tho on current polling labour would just nip a majority and a lot of big name Tories could be in trouble in metropolitain seats (eg including Johnsons seat!) its only the very tight margins in those red wall seats that mean theyd swing back to labour
whats also interesting is that more people now have an opinion on starmer, but still plenty havent made up their minds
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1470798019767513094
it means that even tho on current polling labour would just nip a majority
You mean they’d be the largest party in parliament, rather than getting a majority, yes?
sorry yes
Your wing of the Labour party have had two stabs at it, failed once and then failed miserably, time to let the other wing have a go, unless you want to face eternal Tory rule.
Sigh.
Your wing of Labour if ever elected offers a version of the Tory party that some of us don't particularly want.
So just getting into power with this lot will not offer enough to make a meaningful impact on society.
It will still continue the failed ideology that Tories set in motion. That appears to be their route to power.
Nothing to really get excited about then other than the superficial change from Tory to Labour in name only.
*If it happens* And I still don't think it will under the current set up.
Your wing of Labour if ever elected offers a version of the Tory party that some of us don’t particularly want.
I don't want that either but what if the majority (yes with the current system) decide that is what they want. That same group of voters who haven't wanted a Labour party since Blair.
What does that tell you about what sort of party the majority of voters want?
Democracy sucks when most people don't want what you do doesn't it...
Sigh.
Your wing of Labour if ever elected offers a version of the
ToryLabour party thatsomemost of us don’t particularly want.
FIFY
It’s the protest group response next isn’t it?
With Corbyn, Abbot, Long-Bailey, Butler and others voting against minimal public health measures now common across the continent, at a crucial moment in this pandemic… labelling them as looking like they want to lead a protest group, rather than people ready to govern, looks fair right now. Depressing.
Grandads eased himself back into his comfort zone, trooping through the lobby to vote alongside Desmond Swayne, Peter Bone and the rest of his Brexity fellow travellers
He’s probably getting all his info on the issue from his hatstand sibling